Reentrainment of Motor Activity and Spontaneous Neuronal Activity in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus of Djungarian Hamsters

Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Neurons in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus exhibit a daily rhythm in spontaneous electrical activity Essentially two methods have been employed to record this circadian rhythm: (1) an in vitro brain slice technique and (2) in vivo multiunit recordings. Reentrainment of a circadian output to a shifted light:dark cycle commonly takes several cycles (depending on the amount of shift) until completed. Such a resetting kinetic has also been shown to be valid for SCN electrical activity if recorded in vivo. In an in vitro slice preparation, however, pharmacologically induced resetting is much faster and lacks transients; that is, a shift is completed within one cycle. This study was designed to probe for the presence of transients in the neuronal activity of the SCN in a brain slice preparation. The authors exposed Djungarian hamsters to an 8-h advanced or delayed light:dark cycle and monitored wheel-running activity during reentrainment. Additional groups of identically treated hamsters were used to record the pattern of spontaneous neuronal activity within the SCN using the brain slice preparation. Neuronal activity exhibited the usual rhythm with high firing rates during the projected day and low firing rates during the projected night. However, following 1 day of exposure to the 8-h advanced light:dark cycle, this rhythm disappeared in 6 of 7 slices. Rhythmicity was still absent following 3 days of exposure to the advanced light:dark cycle (n = 4). By contrast, 3 of 7 slices prepared from hamsters exposed to a delayed light:dark cycle for 3 days exhibited a daily rhythm in electrical activity Although pharmacological agents reset the in vitro SCN neuronal activity almost instantaneously and in in vivo studies a stable phase relationship to a shifted light:dark cycle occurs gradually over several cycles, the authors did not detect either of these patterns. Such differences in resetting kinetics (e.g., rapid resetting, gradual reentrainment, temporary lack of measurable rhythmicity) may be due to (a) application of a resetting stimulus in vivo versus in vitro, (b) duration of the resetting stimulus, (c) the nature of the resetting stimulus, or (d) the recording technique employed.